Facebook 'unintentionally uploaded' 1.5M people's email contacts without consent

Post by chucksmash » Fri, Apr 19, 2019, 2:39 AM UTC

cyphar wrote: post #257

chucksmash wrote: post #255

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On its face the statement is true. LM does design missiles, and some non-zero number of them have been used to kill innocent people. I'm curious what part of the statement is important to you in making that decision though. Is it that LM is part of the military-industrial complex, full stop? That the weapons are used by the US military? That they are sold to and used by other governments? Would LM be acceptable if th…

I was using Lockheed-Martin as an example of a "clearly immoral" company, you could replace it with any other example you can think of and the point would be the same (that at some point you have to accept that ignoring your morals in order to get a paycheck means you don't really have those morals). As for my personal view, it's fairly clear that Lockheed-Martin props up (through lobbying) and profits (through gover…

Post by Ayesh » Fri, Apr 19, 2019, 8:22 AM UTC

Post by cyphar » Fri, Apr 19, 2019, 12:12 PM UTC

dwd wrote: post #304

cyphar wrote: post #235

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For those who haven't seen the clip, [1]. Yes Minister is a brilliant piece of satire (though it does have a somewhat unfortunate Thatcher-esque streak when it comes to discussion of unions -- though it would've been difficult to avoid ridiculing unions in satire from the 1980s). [1]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Y4PEqvk0Jg

Just stick with brilliant, and there is also the equally clever second series - Yes, Prime Minister. While it was satire, the was a lot in it that could very well have been reality.

Post by AnthonyMouse » Fri, Apr 19, 2019, 4:22 PM UTC

sonnyblarney wrote: post #298

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #249

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's an organizational policy, procedural, ethics and legal question - not a technical one. Not really. You have to fall back to those things when a good technical solution isn't available, but sometimes it is. Suppose you have a car, and four children. You can enact all the laws and policies and procedures you like, you can lecture the kids not to misbehave a thousand times. But the most important thing you can do…

I fail to see the application of your analogy. The Engineers at FB should be given product direction, and should not even be making decisions as to what information to ask users for. That's for Product. Part of product management will involve legal review, risk management. Clearly, FB has a few other concerns that should be thrown in there as well. This issue basically has nothing to do with technology.

Post by muckrakerz » Tue, Apr 30, 2019, 6:38 PM UTC

elmo2you wrote: post #299

muckrakerz wrote: post #296

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a federal crime as FB is accessing a system that it does not have permission to access. This is the same as you or me hacking into someone else's email. People have gone to jail for a long time for just this crime.

I agree, or so it at least appears. Now we will have to wait and see if the US government (and those of other countries) will actually go after Facebook. They might just do whatever they can to avoid it, either because of their own personal interests (maybe even a corrupt nature), or Facebook's reach might actively bully them out of it (away from the public eye, of course). I don't expect anyone substantial facing co…